BALWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Balwant Singh, who was sentenced to imprisonment for life vide order dated March 16, 1983, by Sessions Judge, Amritsar and has already undergone actual sentence of more than six years of rigorous imprisonment, applied for temporary release on furlough under Section 4 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962, on 15-7-1987. His case though forwarded by the Superintendent Central Jail Amritsar, was rejected by the Inspector General Prisons, Punjab, Chandigarh on October 8, 1987. The present writ petition has been filed by Balwant Singh for his temporary release on furlough, contending that he qualifies for the same, both the conditions of total sentence and actual sentence under. gone having been satisfied, that he maintained a good conduct in jail and that this, case for temporary release was rejected by the authorities in an arbitrary and illegal manner.

(2.) IT is not disputed in the reply filed on behalf of the respondents that conduct of the petitioner while in jail was satisfactory. It is also admitted that 3 weeks furlough case of the petitioner initiated by the Superintendent Jail, Amritsar, on 15-7-1987, was rejected by the Inspector General, Prisons, Punjab on 8-10-1987, although, it is further added that the same was rightly rejected on the basis of the reports of police authorities and District Magistrate. Reports of police authorities are based on the statement of Surjit Kaur, member of the opponent group being widow of the deceased for whose murder, petitioner Balwant Singh was sentenced to imprisonment for life. She naturally would be the last person to relish his release on furlough. She has also stated in a lukewarm maner that in case the petitioner is released on leave, he may harm her as well as her children. She is not definite about the same and I do not think it fair for the police authorities to base their report on her solitary statement that his release would be dangerous to public peace. The report of the District Magistrate, Amritsar which alone is relevant is not based on any data or material. No attempt has been made by him to show as to how law and order is likely to be adversely affected by the release of the petitioner on furlough. He has simply stated that verified through Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar and village Panchayat, reason of leave are not correct. No reasons are provided under the Act for release on furlough although reasons are provided for release on parole. District Magistrate, Amritsar, did not apply his mind to the facts of the case and just dittoed the report of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar, without application of mind. Danger to any individual or individuals does. not even negate legal entitlement of a person under the Act. The opinion of the Releasing Authority, therefore, cannot be justified.